Member
Round 4 coming up and let's hope for another great battle between teams and between teammates, another great race as we saw back in Bahrain. Again, we can expect rainy weekend as it typically has been here and perhaps RBR might have a chance as it seems that they are rather quick in wet weather conditions. Lets hope to see the continuous improvements from Williams, TR and from Force India and to be able to keep Mercedes in sight (although that's very unlikely to happen). Few teams such as Ferrari, Mclaren, and Sauber really need to step up their game as they've been hampered with reliability issues while Ferrari think and say that their ERS system is not operating perfectly and was probably the root cause of lack of speed on the straights. Meh ... sounds like PR or bs stuff to me, but who knows.
Drivers Standings
Championship Points
Nico Rosberg 61 Lewis Hamilton 50 Nico Hulkenberg 28 Fernando Alonso 26 Jenson Button 23 Sebastian Vettel 23 Kevin Magnussen 20 Valtteri Bottas 18 Sergio Perez 16 Daniel Ricciardo 12 Felipe Massa 12 Kimi Raikkonen 7 Jean-Eric Vergne 4 Daniil Kvyat 3
Constructors Standings
Championship Points
Mercedes AMG 111 Force India 44 Mclaren 43 Red Bull Racing 35 Ferrari 33 Williams 30 Scuderia Toro Rosso 7 Lotus F1 Team 0 Sauber 0 Marussia 0 Caterham 0
Last edited by auaq; 04-14-2014 at 11:46 PM.
2x iSketch champion
Domenicali steps down, about time.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113446
Member
Yep, no reason to be doing this poorly with the drivers they have. It's obviously the 4th or 5th best car this year.Originally Posted by gary88
Member
And, so should Luca ... Still remembering his depressing face when he saw how badly his team performed in the last race and eventually decided to leave before the end of race.
2x iSketch champion
They put the CEO of Ferrari North America who has no motorsport experience in charge now which makes me want to think this is only temporary until they can find someone better or convince Ross Brawn to come back.
Member
I doubt they'll bring him back.
2x iSketch champion
People also doubted Kimi going back to Ferrari after being kicked out...
Member
nothing worse than when I have to sit next to few brits in the stands talking about F1 politics.
Member
While Stefano has resigned, Bob Bell from Mercedes AMG leaves the team by the end of November 2014. His roles will be taken over by Paddy Lowe and Toto.
Member
HülkenBERG......BERG! BERGBERGBERGBERGBERGBERGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!
Sorry and thank you.
BMWs are fun in the snow too...
2x iSketch champion
Wall of text warning: Summary of the Red Bull hearing on fuelgate today
Open and shut case. I hope they get the book thrown at them.Red Bull hearing – a summary of the events
Today sees a fascinating gathering at the FIA headquarters, as Red Bull and their lawyers, Mercedes represented by the enigmatic Paul (bulldog) Harris and the FIA and with legal team fight out the validity of the stewards decision to disqualify Red Bull’s Daniel Ricciardo from the season opening race in Melbourne.
Judge Duijm commenced proceedings and urged all parties not to waste time. “The facts are in the statements”, he states. The lawyers are asked to question the witnesses only to details that are not already listed in the files.
This means we may not be party to everything the varies sides are saying, however the contentious matters should be cross-examined.
Red Bull lawyer Ali Malek speaks first and questions whether the Stewards had the right to disqualify Daniel Ricciardo. He questions whether the FIA measurement was correct suggesting the FIA must prove that Ricciardo was at any time outside the required flow rate.
Everything revolves around the sensor FF73 and Malek argues that Red Bull’s position is that it was not working correctly. He further argues that there is no rule which justifies the FIA sensor as the only usable measurement.
FIA lawyer Sebastien Bernard interjects stating that there can be only one official measurement. “If everyone [each team] measures at will, because they are of the opinion, the official measurement is wrong, we have anarchy.”
The FIA representative explains how the calibration of the FIA sensor works. In a test, the measurements are established and any errors are provided for with a correction factor. Only this creates equal conditions for all parties involved.
Sebastian Bernard argues, the deviations on Sunday were exactly the same on the sensor which Red Bull had installed on Friday. Hence there was no reason for Red Bull to defy the instruction to operate the same correction factor.
Further, with the exception of 5 laps, Ricciardo’s car was consistently above the 100 kgs/ph limit as evidenced by the Gill sensor. However, at times Red Bull increased the fuel flow rate, to around 104kgs/ph. Under the safety car the rate fell as low as 95% of the maximum.
Interestingly, later in the proceeding Red Bull made a minimalist effort to argue the flow rate across the entire race was legal. The fact that it dropped during the safety car period would have assisted in making that possible whilst retaining 2nd place from Magnussen.
Bernard for the FIA questions why Ricciardo’s car only ran to the correct fuel flow rate during the period behind the safety car, no satisfactory reply is forthcoming.
The Mercedes attack dog enters the fray. He states Mercedes calculations indicate that by ignoring the FIA instruction, Red Bull had gained an advantage of 0.4 seconds per lap. Harris continues by dismissing Red Bull’s actions as arrogant.
“Red Bull believe their measurement is better than that of the FIA?. It is not even a physical measurement, but a software model”. Harris suggests Red Bull are motivated by what suits them best and not what is proper and fair.
Paul Harris observes that if Mercedes had applied Red Bull’s philosophy, “we could have gone even faster in these circumstances. And what happens next? Should everyone be allowed to use their own measurement model when they are not satisfied with the FIA measures?”
Paul Monaghan, Red Bull engineer takes the stand and agrees with the previous statements, that by ignoring the FIA instructions, Ricciardo’s car ran around 0.4 seconds a lap quicker.
He presents the argument that all the engine data in FP1 on 2 separate laps gave identical readings, yet the fuel flow sensor gave two different readings. One read 1.2% different from Red Bulls algorithmic calculations and the second time 1.3% difference.
He argues this should not happen. Given the same engine data, the fuel flow rate should be the same.
The Red Bull man then claims that the team did not need to ignore the FIA directives in Malaysia due to the temperature differences between there and at the Australian GP – hence the teams calculations in Sepang revealed there was no need to exceed the FIA regulated fuel flow rate.
The FIA representative asks Monaghan whether Red Bull are in fact measuring the flow of fuel directly. Monaghan denies this stating “it is a calculation based on differing measurements which include the amount of time the fuel injectors are open, the injection quantity, fuel density, and fuel temperature.” Monaghan claims that this measurement has an accuracy range of plus and minus one percent.
Mercedes lawyer Harris interjects. “So Red Bull present figures of a computing model and data – not a direct measurement. Nobody knows what or why data is entered into the model.” He summarises, to agree a process like this and all the underlying assumptions team by team would be impossible for the FIA.
Horner sits disinterestedly fiddling with his smart phone. ()
Monaghan is asked why the team did not use the spare sensor they had available in Australia. He initially just restates the Red Bull position on sensors being temperamental. When pressed by Mercedes Paul Harris, he reveals that this sensor had been fitted to the spare chassis, which was flown back to the UK during the weekend.
Harris acerbically asks, “and no one thought to remove it?”
It then becomes apparent that on lap 37, Red Bull increased further the fuel flow rate into the engine. When questioned Monaghan replied that the conditions had changed and their calculations would now allow even more fuel to be used to stay within the 100kgs/ph for the entire race.
David Mart, a Renault engineer who works with the Red Bull team is called. He explains it was not his decision to refuse the FIA request to reduce the fuel flow as the car is legally Red Bull’s. He also suggests the offset requested by the FIA was not applied to the fuel flow calculations.
Newey interjects, taking responsibility for the team’s defiance, stating he made the decision. It also becomes apparent that prior to the race, Red Bull had been given an offset calculation to programme into the sensor. This was not done.
In his defence, Newey states he told FIA representative, Fabrice Lom, prior to the race he had doubts over the calculations. Mercedes Paul Harris quizzes the Red Bull guru asking if any other team refused to run the FIA fuel flow rates, would that be reasonable. “If they have plausible evidence, yes”, was Newey’s response.
Red Bull argue the sensor drifted during FP1 and hence cannot provide accurate measurements. The FIA say it did not drift – and indeed that the 13 failed sensors during this year’s competition, when fail, stop operating completely.
Witness Jeff Calam of Red Bull is called. No one has a question for him. He is excused amidst general chuckling.
Fabrice Lom, the FIA expert takes the stand. He explains that even during the practice sessions, Red Bull had failed to run the correct offset value, and so their calculations were wrong.
Further ‘dodgy’ sensor FF73 used by Ricciardo in Australia was replaced by sensor FF210 in Malaysia, and the exact same readings were produced, despite the temperature differences.
Lom concludes this must mean that Renault and Red Bull’s algorithms were incorrect.
Fabrice Lom then presents an interesting chart. It lists all 58 laps of Daniel Ricciardo’s car with the lap times and the corresponding flow rate. With the exception of laps 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 Ricciardo drives consistently above 100 kg / h mark.
In the first 12 laps before the safety car phase the value is 100.5 to 100.8 kg / h. Following the safety car it rises to 100.4 to 101.1 kg / h.
In the last four laps when Ricciardo is fighting Kevin Magnussen for second place, interestingly the average fuel flow rate is at its highest for the race and increases again in range from to from 101.0 – 101.0 to between 101 0 and 101.1 kg / h.
Lom produces another chart which shows the effect of Red Bull’s actions with the applied offset. This shows the corrected Red Bull model would have shown values ranged from 99.02 kg / h during the safety car phase to 103.37 kg / h in the race.
Mercedes electronics engineer, Evan Short is called. He explains, “A sensor provides a direct measurement, the calculation of the team can be at best an approximation.”
Evan Short reveals during qualifying in Melbourne, the FIA had informed them Rosberg was using too high a fuel flow rate. It was immediately brought in line with the correction as instructed,
There was a huge argument over consumption peaks and averages, much of which was unintelligible unless one has a PhD in mathematics, yet herein may hang the key to the Judges decision.
In conclusion, the FIA representative spins Red Bull’s arguments on their head. He demands, “they should indeed provide proof that the sensor fluctuated unnecessarily. If they decide not to follow the instructions of the referee, they must provide solid good evidence that the sensor has not been working properly. Their alleged evidence has convinced no one.”
Mercedes Paul Harris clearly remembers being on the other side of the fence over ‘testgate’ and the punitive demands for punishment against the team from Brackley demanded by Red Bull. In fact during the day, he was probably a more effective prosecutor of the issues than the FIA’s own legal representatives.
He reminds the court that this is a violation of section 12.1.1 c as Red Bull denied the instructions of FIA officials and that this in fact harms the interest of fair competition. It will be difficult for Red Bull to argue they acted in good faith as did Mercedes
Harris recalls the case of the BAR fraudulent fuel case in 2005 where the team was banned for 2 races in Barcelona and Monaco and given a six month suspended ban with a disqualification from the race where their fuel irregularities were discovered.
The Mercedes legal representative argued Red Bull’s actions were indeed more serious than those of BAR, because they intentionally defied the FIA regulators and are attempting to protests a physical measurement with a mere calculation.
It’s interesting that most of the information provided at the proceedings today, have been fought over in the media already. As TJ13 stated in Malaysia when the FIA decided to brief the mass media, this was an unprecedented move and one which indicates the serious intent to enforce the fuel flow regulations.
Red Bull’s decision to appeal is a high stakes gamble, as clearly Ricciardo’s DQ is no longer the maximum penalty they could suffer. The precedents are there for a ban or a further loss of constructor and driver points.
Red Bull’s position is that technical directives are not binding and that the fuel sensor drifted. The FIA are in drect opposition to this position, and Red Bull appear to have little support from others for their the second of their two claims.
This is a completely different case from the Mercedes hearing in 2013, because then the Brackley team were deemed to have acted in good faith and with the co-operation of the FIA’s representative Charlie Whiting.
“We will announce the decision tomorrow morning at the latest,” said Jean-Christophe Breillat at the end today’s six-hour hearing. A full explanation of the reasoning behind the decision will be published “by the end of the week”.
Member
This, and all the other stuff that wasn't presented from Red Bull's side probably is the key to the truth of the matter.
Seems that there were inaccurate readings intermittently (peaks), and since the fuel flow rate is just a collection of measurement points averaged out, those false readings screw up those averages and therefore the overall reading. FIA tried to play around with the frequency as an emergency fix. It's amazing that they are sitting there trying to pass that on as 'official data' and are disputing Red Bull's measurements which all teams are using as a means of CHECKING if the sensors are working!
It's very funny how Mercedes' lawyer disputes Red Bull's fuel flow data as 'only being calculations': “So Red Bull present figures of a computing model and data – not a direct measurement. Nobody knows what or why data is entered into the model.”
Their engineer says that “A sensor provides a direct measurement, the calculation of the team can be at best an approximation.” Wow, they're really there just trolling Red Bull! How does a sensor operate?? It TAKES MEASUREMENTS of certain data, then calculates this data using a computing model to give a reading!! Red Bull's method of course does exactly the same: it takes measurements of certain data, then calculates using a computing model to give a reading.
More precisely the Gill sensor takes periodic measurements of how long ultrasonic pulses take to travel within the fuel line, and also of temperature at least (also pressure and other variables?), and then calculates the data it receives using a computing model to give a reading for a certain time. The method Red Bull uses (and 99.999% certainly all the other teams, including Mercedes use) is measuring the opening time of the injectors/from fuel rail, temperature and pressure, then calculates the data it receives using a computing model to give a reading for the time that they wish. AFAIK all the data which is the basis Red Bull's measurements is easily verifiable from the engine management software, and by checking the fuel flow rate of the fuel rail (which is calibrated).
Furthermore, I've heard (not 100% substantiated) that the Gill sensor is incapable of providing accurate (or any kind of proper) measurements in hard acceleration and transition from zero to fast flow. All they can prove is that the sensors work 'pretty well', if calibrated, corrected with a few percent here and there for god knows what reason they are off 'a bit', only in steady enough flow! In F1 there are of course fast changes from no acceleration to hard acceleration, gear changes etc.. And with gear changes we have rpm change, which in turn means fuel flow limit change - how accurately does the Gill sensor handle that?
What seems to be the worst problem with the Gill sensor is using such a method for high resolution sampling, in an environment full of sources of distortion. You have all kinds of vibrations, shocks etc.. And clearly the teams are having severe issues with 'spikes'.
What we have learned so far is that the sensors keep failing and aren't accurate so they need all kinds of tricks and fooling around for them to get the right fuel flow level -approximately. Which the teams check by using the same method as Red Bull does.... But now in court one main competitor of course says that is not a valid method? How does Mercedes know if the sensors' information is accurate if they don't check it against the same 'baseline data' that Red Bull and the other teams use?? Haha, there is no way that anyone can believe that Mercedes has no way of knowing what their fuel flow rate is other than the Gill sensor - and yet they can be sure that the sensor's data is accurate...even though they claim that there is no other way to check fuel flow?? BS.
Red Bull had their injectors sealed and sent to be verified with monitoring personnel present, so there should be completely reliable data on the actual fuel flow which they themselves measured. Like the other teams do.
Funny how that article puts the main focus and spotlight on the statements of a main competitor, and someone who clearly has a MAJOR chip on their shoulder after his team apparently were found guilty in a clear violation of the rules earlier. Seems that in that case they themselves didn't deny that they were wrong, but apparently that was somehow Red Bull's fault? I mean, the author paints the Mercedes guy as an impartial, most wise expert! Oh, no other teams support Red Bull? How can that be? Don't they go out of their way to help a competitor win?
What's the source?
Seems that Mercedes has some very important reason to keep the Gill sensors in F1. I wonder why...
Last edited by MagneZium; 04-15-2014 at 12:07 AM.
BMWs are fun in the snow too...
Member
Don't know what you're talking about. You may want to recheck!
- - - Updated - - -
Gary, where did you get that source from? Also, I don't get why is Mercedes presence so important or rather necessary in the first place? We know that the sensor's reading is off by a certain margin/percent and the teams know how to check them and the fact that even Fia knew about it and correspondingly advised them to make the necessary correction. What amuses me is that RBR is probably the only team out there dare enough to take this matter on hands to the Fia and to the court while the rest of the teams are just sitting back, chilling and relaxing? That seems very unruly from Mercedes side. It could have been made better to rectify this situation on that Gill sensor by working with the Fia and the teams altogether to sort out its calibration. Mercedes representative is only there to further knock out RBR from the constructors championship and also to further aid in their chance of winning this season.
Last edited by auaq; 04-15-2014 at 12:22 AM.
2x iSketch champion
Source: http://thejudge13.com
Verdict in today: FIA's decision to exclude Ricciardo upheld.
http://www.fia.com/international-cou...-14-april-2014
Shame for Daniel, but rules are rules. So much for Horner's "the technical directives are actually just opinions" argument that he was so sure of.
Member
Well, life will go on ...
http://www.f1technical.net/news/1928...c2f7847f21a528
Retired BW Fueler
I say give the teams 101kg of fuel and let them race. Finish with under 1kg in the tank and you are DQed.
Valhalla Awaits
The gap on team stands is crazy haha
Excited to see another race. Actually home so I can watch it!
Lead Disagreement Eng PE
Fuel flow limits are key to actually having any semblance of racing between the different constructors. Racecar Engineering had a good opinion piece on it last year, but the short of it is that without fuel flow limits you end up with a HIGHLY variable amount of power, and it just makes the fastest/most efficient car turn the flow up until they get into clean air then tailor it back and cruise to the end of the race. Anybody comes up - just turn the wick up that little bit more at the beginning of straights to prevent a pass.
Fuel mass flow limits are NEEDED in F1. Fuel weight limits only will just make the racing that much worse.
Member
The weather forecast suggests to be dry but cloudy for the most of this weekend albeit a slight chance of rain on Saturday. RBR may have a chance in qualifying.
922r Compliant
Moderator
Forget the brass. Ferrari are going to have to start looking for another driver if this continues. Alonso's only got a few years left and he won't want to spend them in a mid-pack car.
With Honda and McLaren getting together...
2x iSketch champion
Actually...
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12...-danger-levels
Member
I think that Ferrari need a complete reshuffling or a complete reorganization, they need to get rid of the old horses over there and start a fresh new. Luca needs to go.
Sounds like that's the plan to get Brawn back for the time being, but again I don't know even if Ross Brawn is still the same old Ross Brawn that we've known about him during the days of Benetton and Ferrari.
- - - Updated - - -
A bit off topic but something nice to see.
http://www.formula1.com/gallery/other/2013/802.html
922r Compliant
Moderator
I'm honestly not sure what to make of Ross at this juncture. His impact at Ferrari is the benchmark for legendary... then he went on to build a monster car for Jenson and Rubbens... and then pulled a George Lucas at Mercedes - with Michael - and subsequently exited, stage left.
Member
I just don't know if he can still make a winning car anymore and that's why I doubt him.
Looks like we've got about 4 more hours to go for the FP1 tonight.
2x iSketch champion
You are seeing Mercedes' performance this year, right?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks